On 09/27/2015 11:44 AM, Xen wrote:
It is not simply "a driver" :-)
That is pretty much irrelevant. Software Linux RAID does the same and I don't think there is really a great performance penalty. The issue is with these cards that (a) it requires a driver for the OS to even see the RAID as a RAID and (b) that it requires a driver to pretty much do anything.
There get to be a point where you go off on a misunderstanding. The whole point of hardware RAID is that the OS doesn't see it as RAID. It looks like just one very large, very reliable disk. As I mentioned earlier, I've used the IBM configuration and I've also used RAID "boxes" from other vendors. In all cases it looks like a single BIG disk, attached via SCSI or Fibre, depending on the equipment in use. There may be, external to the computer *using* the RAID array, a management system, a management console or port. But unless you take extraordinary measure the main machine does not see that. You statement that it require a driver to see the RAID as RAID is irrelevant when it comes to hardware RAID. That's the whole point - the system is *NOT* supposed to be managing it! As for "requires a driver to pretty much do anything", well of course you'll need the SCSI or the SATA or the fibre driver. Big deal. -- A: Yes. > Q: Are you sure? >> A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. >>> Q: Why is top posting frowned upon? -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org